[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH Remus v2 00/10] Remus support for Migration-v2

On 05/09/2015 02:12 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 08/05/15 10:33, Yang Hongyang wrote:
This patchset implement the Remus support for Migration v2 but without
memory compressing.

The series can be found on github:

PATCH 1-7: Some refactor and prepare work.
PATCH 8-9: The main Remus loop implement.
PATCH 10: Fix for Remus.

I have reviewed the other half of the series now, and have some design
to discuss.  (I was hoping to get this email sent in reply to v1, but
never mind).  This largely concerns patch 7 and onwards.

Migration v2 has substantially more structure than legacy did.  Once
issue so far is that your series relies on using more than one END
record, which is not supported in the spec.  (Of course - the spec is
fine to be extended in forward-compatible ways.)

I use END record as a info that indicate the end of the stream. I saw
that you add a checkpoint record in your v2 series of Remus related patches,
I can use that record to indicate the end of the checkpointed stream, but
I think the record better to be called as end-of-checkpoint?

To fix the qemu layering issues I need to have some explicit negotiation
between libxc and libxl about sharing ownership of the input fd.  This
is going to require a new record in the format, and I currently drafting
a patch or two which should help in this regard.

My view for the eventual stream looks something like this (time going

libxc writes:                   libxl writes:

Image Header
Domain Header

<live memory>

this callback suspend the primary guest and then calls Remus devices
postsuspend callbacks to buffer the network pkts etc.

<last iter of memory>

Checkpoint record

this callback should not be omitted, it do some necessary work before resume
primary (such as call Remus devices preresume callbacks to ensure the disk
data is consistent) and then resume the primary guest. I think this
callback should be renamed to ctx->save.callbacks->resume().

                                 libxl qemu record

Maybe we should add another callback to send qemu record instead of
using checkpoint callback. We can call it ctx->save.callbacks->save_qemu()
Then in checkpoint callback, we only call remus devices commit callbacks(
which will release the network buffer etc...) then decide whether we need to
do another checkpoint or quit checkpointed stream.
With Remus, checkpoint callback only wait for 200ms(can be specified by -i)
then return.
With COLO, checkpoint callback will ask COLO proxy if we need to do a
checkpoint, will return when COLO proxy module indicate a checkpoint is needed.

                                 libxl end-of-checkpoint record
             ctx->save.callbacks->checkpoint() returns


Checkpoint record

This will eventually allow both libxc and libxl to send checkpoint data
(and by the looks of it, remove the need for postcopy()).  With this
libxc/remus work it is fine to use XG_LIBXL_HVM_COMPAT to cover the
current qemu situation, but I would prefer not to be also retrofitting
libxc checkpoint records when doing the libxl/migv2 work.

Does this look plausible in for Remus (and eventually COLO) support?

With comments above, I would suggest the save flow as below:

libxc writes:                   libxl writes:

live migration:
Image Header
Domain Header
<live memory>
<last iter memory>
if ( checkpointd )
  End of Checkpoint record
  /*If resotre side receives this record, input fd should be handed to libxl*/
  goto end

loop of checkpointed stream:
                                libxl qemu record
                                libxl end-of-checkpoint record
/*If resotre side receives this record, input fd should be handed to libxc*/
ctx->save.callbacks->save_qemu() returns
End of Checkpoint record
goto 'loop of checkpointed stream'

END record
/*If resotre side receives this record, input fd should be handed to libxl*/

In order to keep it simple, we can keep the current ctx->save.callbacks->checkpoint() as it is, which do the save_qemu thing, call
Remus devices commit callbacks and then decide whether we need a checkpoint. We
can also combine the ctx->save.callbacks->resume() with
ctx->save.callbacks->checkpoint(), with only one checkpoint() callback, we do
the following things:
 - Call Remus devices preresume callbacks
 - Resume the primary
 - Save qemu records
 - Call Remus devices commit callbacks
 - Decide whether we need a checkpoint

Overall, there are 3 options for the save flow:
1. keep the current callbacks, rename postcopy() to resume()
2. split the checkpoint() callback to save_qemu() and checkpoint()
3. combine the current postcopy() and checkpoint()
Which one do you think is the best?



Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.